BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) -- A major report on how global warming will dramatically change life on Earth will likely read less dire about massive extinctions than scientists originally wrote.
Participants in marathon negotiations over an authoritative climate change report, due out Friday, said government delegates have weakened the original language in the report.
A final draft of the report -- written by scientists before government officials edit it -- says "roughly 20-30 percent of species are likely to be at high risk of irreversible extinction" if global average temperature rises by 2.7 to 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit.
That part has been "diluted," said retired scientist Ian Burton attending the session on behalf of the Stockholm Environment Institute.
Another delegate said the amended version hedged on the sweep of the original text, inserting a reference to species "assessed so far."
Guy Midgley of the National Botanical Institute in South Africa, a lead author of the chapter on ecosystems that includes extinctions, said the changes will be "commensurate with the science."
Negotiations stretched past midnight and into early Friday. One issue of major debate was whether to delete all or parts of key tables specifying the projected impact of each rise of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, delegates said.
Another prolonged tussle emerged over whether to include estimated costs of damage from climate change -- calculated per ton of carbon dioxide emissions, said the delegates on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
Negotiations were expected to push right up against a Friday morning deadline for the report's release.
As they broke for dinner Thursday, carrying yellow boxes with gift chocolate Easter eggs, negotiators said they were in for a long night, but had confidence they will make their deadline.
There is little dispute about the science, although some disagree about their confidence in the research. But the main issue at the Brussels conference is how the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will say what it has to say in the most effective possible way -- that 120 nations' negotiators can accept.
The key is making it easily understandable, said Oyvind Christophersen, who heads the Norwegian delegation as a senior adviser for climate and energy. "The challenge is how to summarize a big, big report."
The entire final draft report, obtained last week by The Associated Press, has 20 chapters, supplements, two summaries and totals 1,572 pages. This week's wrangling is just over the 21-page summary for policymakers.
It is the second of four reports from the IPCC this year; the first report in February laid out the scientific case for how global warming is happening. This second report is the "so what" report, explaining what the effects of global warming will be.
The situation became so slow that the panel chairman took the unusual step of warning delegates to get moving and scientists started grumbling about the possibility of recessing the conference until June, a scientist told The Associated Press. The scientist spoke on condition of anonymity because participants have been warned by top officials not to divulge details of negotiations.
Some of the biggest debates expected Thursday in the closed-door negotiating session center on what to include on the charts that summarize "key vulnerabilities" the world faces with global warming.
The charts have been called a "highway to extinction" because they show that with every degree of warming, the condition of much of the world worsens -- with starvation, floods and the disappearance of species.
Those charts "tell us there's a danger in the future," said Belgian delegate Julian Vandeburie, who is in the science policy branch of his government.
Vandeburie compared the world's current situation to the Munich peace conference in 1938, when Britain and France had a choice between confronting Hitler and appeasing him: "We are at the same moment. We have to decide on doing something or not."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Participants in marathon negotiations over an authoritative climate change report, due out Friday, said government delegates have weakened the original language in the report.
A final draft of the report -- written by scientists before government officials edit it -- says "roughly 20-30 percent of species are likely to be at high risk of irreversible extinction" if global average temperature rises by 2.7 to 4.5 degrees Fahrenheit.
That part has been "diluted," said retired scientist Ian Burton attending the session on behalf of the Stockholm Environment Institute.
Another delegate said the amended version hedged on the sweep of the original text, inserting a reference to species "assessed so far."
Guy Midgley of the National Botanical Institute in South Africa, a lead author of the chapter on ecosystems that includes extinctions, said the changes will be "commensurate with the science."
Negotiations stretched past midnight and into early Friday. One issue of major debate was whether to delete all or parts of key tables specifying the projected impact of each rise of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, delegates said.
Another prolonged tussle emerged over whether to include estimated costs of damage from climate change -- calculated per ton of carbon dioxide emissions, said the delegates on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
Negotiations were expected to push right up against a Friday morning deadline for the report's release.
As they broke for dinner Thursday, carrying yellow boxes with gift chocolate Easter eggs, negotiators said they were in for a long night, but had confidence they will make their deadline.
There is little dispute about the science, although some disagree about their confidence in the research. But the main issue at the Brussels conference is how the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will say what it has to say in the most effective possible way -- that 120 nations' negotiators can accept.
The key is making it easily understandable, said Oyvind Christophersen, who heads the Norwegian delegation as a senior adviser for climate and energy. "The challenge is how to summarize a big, big report."
The entire final draft report, obtained last week by The Associated Press, has 20 chapters, supplements, two summaries and totals 1,572 pages. This week's wrangling is just over the 21-page summary for policymakers.
It is the second of four reports from the IPCC this year; the first report in February laid out the scientific case for how global warming is happening. This second report is the "so what" report, explaining what the effects of global warming will be.
The situation became so slow that the panel chairman took the unusual step of warning delegates to get moving and scientists started grumbling about the possibility of recessing the conference until June, a scientist told The Associated Press. The scientist spoke on condition of anonymity because participants have been warned by top officials not to divulge details of negotiations.
Some of the biggest debates expected Thursday in the closed-door negotiating session center on what to include on the charts that summarize "key vulnerabilities" the world faces with global warming.
The charts have been called a "highway to extinction" because they show that with every degree of warming, the condition of much of the world worsens -- with starvation, floods and the disappearance of species.
Those charts "tell us there's a danger in the future," said Belgian delegate Julian Vandeburie, who is in the science policy branch of his government.
Vandeburie compared the world's current situation to the Munich peace conference in 1938, when Britain and France had a choice between confronting Hitler and appeasing him: "We are at the same moment. We have to decide on doing something or not."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
No comments:
Post a Comment